3 ms·

It seems froma banking perspective an address is more secure than most forms of identity. This makes sense as it is very hard (though not impossible) to pretend

It seems froma banking perspective an address is more secure than most forms of identity. This makes sense as it is very hard (though not impossible) to pretend you live at an address that is not directly sympathetic to you for a long period of time. So here HSBC seem to be saying - if you are working with a charity (ie. have a case worker), and that charity vouches for you, then we've done the dance that makes it less of an issue for the charity to help you with an address. but you still have an address; its just the charities' address. This is a good solution for homelessness. Its hacky, it will miss people, but it is quick. I expect the path to getting digital nomads a verifiable address via some kind of service will be a long one; and being able to bank without an address even longer.

Danieru 4y ago
Plus those accounts are going to be locked rather quick if large amounts start getting wired in. I imagine accounts setup to help the homeless would make poor money mules. Sort of the inverse situation making corporate accounts hard to get in Japan. Such an account can receive large volumes of cash without raising red flags.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  Unless the rules have been tightened since then, fintechs such as Revolut and Monzo (back when it was a prepaid card) used to open accounts instantly with no KYC with low limits (which they get raised when you pass KYC), so I wonder why they wouldn't just do the same and skip the KYC step altogether.
  - data_maan 4y ago
    Is this still happening? I feel all fintechs use KYC now. Even other services, such as Airbnb, oddly have started to use KYC.
Nextgrid 4y ago
> It seems froma banking perspective an address is more secure than most forms of identity. I disagree, an address is trivially falsifiable compared to something like an ID or tax record (both of which the government can actually authenticate, and I'd expect/hope that financial institutions have a way to verify them that way). The concept of a useless, trivially-falsifiable "proof of address" became a standard in the country so what the bank is doing here is merely covering their ass. As long as the entire country believes that "proof of address" is secure then they're in the clear - whether that stops any financial crime doesn't actually matter, especially when the government would rather focus on internet filters or endless gossiping about lockdown parties.
- Normal_gaussian 4y ago
  The bank needs an address because they verify the address themselves. They literally send your card and sensitive info to it. If you try and register 100s of cards to one address, they would notice. If you try and register to 100s of different addresses you can bet your backside that a majority of the residents would return to sender. Before your address is verified your account has much more stringent fraud flags.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> It seems from a banking perspective an address is more secure than most forms of identity. My Indentity card has chip and pin on it with my biometrix data. Some countries have cryptograpgic signatures in them. You think addresses are secure? They are not even real. They are not a spesific location like GPS coordinates. They are any written text that gets mailto you. An address of 'big yellow house' can be valid. The following 'address' was delivered: “Lives across the road from the Spar, his ma and da used to own it, his mother was Mary and da Joseph, moved to Waterfoot after he got married, plays guitar and used to run discos in the parochial hall and the hotel in the 80s. Friends with the fella who runs the butchers in Waterfoot too.”' https://static.guim.co.uk/images/favicon-32x32.ico https://static.guim.co.uk/images/favicon-32x32.ico Postcards with 'England' can get delivered to the right person: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/christmas-card-addressed-england-reaches-7069082 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/christmas-card-addr...
- dan-robertson 4y ago
  For political reasons the U.K. (and US) are opposed to having identity cards so that isn’t really a workable solution. 8 think it’s also inaccurate to say that your address for the purposes of banking is ‘anything one can write on a letter to have the Royal Mail deliver it to you’. For example, you probably can’t give the address of a hotel where you’re staying.
  - Symbiote 4y ago
    They're also against having a population register. Denmark has a population register ("CPR") [1], but does not have identity cards. It's required that you update your address in the register if you move house or emigrate. Everyone also has a NemKonto ("EasyAccount"), which is a nominated bank account linked to the CPR (somehow) to receive payments from public institutions. That should make fraud of this type even more difficult. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Det_Centrale_Personregister https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Det_Centrale_Personregister
  - ghaff 4y ago
    It's probably more accurate to say that it's any residential address that, in the case of the US, is in the USPS address database. Though there are probably exceptions.

Danieru 4y ago

Plus those accounts are going to be locked rather quick if large amounts start getting wired in. I imagine accounts setup to help the homeless would make poor money mules. Sort of the inverse situation making corporate accounts hard to get in Japan. Such an account can receive large volumes of cash without raising red flags.

Nextgrid 4y ago
Unless the rules have been tightened since then, fintechs such as Revolut and Monzo (back when it was a prepaid card) used to open accounts instantly with no KYC with low limits (which they get raised when you pass KYC), so I wonder why they wouldn't just do the same and skip the KYC step altogether.
- data_maan 4y ago
  Is this still happening? I feel all fintechs use KYC now. Even other services, such as Airbnb, oddly have started to use KYC.

Nextgrid 4y ago

> It seems froma banking perspective an address is more secure than most forms of identity. I disagree, an address is trivially falsifiable compared to something like an ID or tax record (both of which the government can actually authenticate, and I'd expect/hope that financial institutions have a way to verify them that way). The concept of a useless, trivially-falsifiable "proof of address" became a standard in the country so what the bank is doing here is merely covering their ass. As long as the entire country believes that "proof of address" is secure then they're in the clear - whether that stops any financial crime doesn't actually matter, especially when the government would rather focus on internet filters or endless gossiping about lockdown parties.

Normal_gaussian 4y ago
The bank needs an address because they verify the address themselves. They literally send your card and sensitive info to it. If you try and register 100s of cards to one address, they would notice. If you try and register to 100s of different addresses you can bet your backside that a majority of the residents would return to sender. Before your address is verified your account has much more stringent fraud flags.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago

> It seems from a banking perspective an address is more secure than most forms of identity. My Indentity card has chip and pin on it with my biometrix data. Some countries have cryptograpgic signatures in them. You think addresses are secure? They are not even real. They are not a spesific location like GPS coordinates. They are any written text that gets mailto you. An address of 'big yellow house' can be valid. The following 'address' was delivered: “Lives across the road from the Spar, his ma and da used to own it, his mother was Mary and da Joseph, moved to Waterfoot after he got married, plays guitar and used to run discos in the parochial hall and the hotel in the 80s. Friends with the fella who runs the butchers in Waterfoot too.”' https://static.guim.co.uk/images/favicon-32x32.ico https://static.guim.co.uk/images/favicon-32x32.ico Postcards with 'England' can get delivered to the right person: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/christmas-card-addressed-england-reaches-7069082 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/christmas-card-addr...

dan-robertson 4y ago
For political reasons the U.K. (and US) are opposed to having identity cards so that isn’t really a workable solution. 8 think it’s also inaccurate to say that your address for the purposes of banking is ‘anything one can write on a letter to have the Royal Mail deliver it to you’. For example, you probably can’t give the address of a hotel where you’re staying.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  They're also against having a population register. Denmark has a population register ("CPR") [1], but does not have identity cards. It's required that you update your address in the register if you move house or emigrate. Everyone also has a NemKonto ("EasyAccount"), which is a nominated bank account linked to the CPR (somehow) to receive payments from public institutions. That should make fraud of this type even more difficult. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Det_Centrale_Personregister https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Det_Centrale_Personregister
- ghaff 4y ago
  It's probably more accurate to say that it's any residential address that, in the case of the US, is in the USPS address database. Though there are probably exceptions.